"CPL, If you look at my prior post you will see that I said the laws need to be changed so that they can report it to the data base so it would show up on a background check."

I have interest in changing HIPAA law. There's plenty of people out there who are seeking help for mental health issues who have no interest in buying a gun. So putting their name in a database incase they ever do decide to buy one isn't a great idea, imo.

T

Danville PA

Username hidden
(3235 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

""Most of my guns are designed and built to hit targets very accurately for competition, but they can kill if need be"

Now that's some funny shit right there.

Hendersonville NC

Username hidden
(2984 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

Karl Benz didn't invent the car with the intent of using it to drive really fast in circles. It's primary intent then and now is for transportation. This is evidenced by the number of commuter vehicles in the world as compared to race cars.

A guns primary intent then and now is for killing. This is evidenced by the number of guns in the world used for hunting and combat as compared to number of them used for competition.

The fact that competitive events have been developed around either of them doesn't change the primary intent. That's like saying that paper is intended to be used as a target rather than something to write on.

T

Danville PA

Username hidden
(3235 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

I am firmly convinced that this "mental health" angle is a complete red herring, and that it could not possibly reduce gun deaths by more than one percent.

One percent of 30,000 gun deaths per year is 300 people saved per year. We might spend $1000 per citizen determining their mental health. As cplo just stated, the success rate would be marginal at best.

A thousand bucks times 300 million people is 300 billion dollars. Suppose once every 10 years suffices, for a mental exam. That's 30 billion to save some 300 people, per year.

A mere $10,000,000 per life saved? It could be less; or it could be more, if people put up a fight over whether to get tested, or dispute the findings, or ...

Hendersonville NC

Username hidden
(2984 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

CPL, If you look at my prior post you will see that I said the laws need to be changed so that they can report it to the data base so it would show up on a background check.

Berryville VA

Username hidden
(1750 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

"The intent of a gun is to rip through flesh, whether its for hunting purposes or for war. The gun wasn't invented because some dude wanted to see if he could hit a paper target. "

Baloney. A NASCAR vehicle could take you to work, or the store, but that's not what it was designed to do.

Pittsburgh PA

Username hidden
(17914 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

"Most of my guns are designed and built to hit targets very accurately for competition, but they can kill if need be"

The intent of a gun is to rip through flesh, whether its for hunting purposes or for war. The gun wasn't invented because some dude wanted to see if he could hit a paper target.

T

Danville PA

Username hidden
(3235 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

"Fix the mental health system let them report what they find."

Problem with this is that you're dealing with HIPAA laws. If I'm "unbalanced" and seeing a counselor or a shrink, my right to privacy prevents my Dr from disclosing anything about my condition.....even if it's just to give a simple yay or nay in some state or federal database. However, if I want to purchase a gun then I have to give consent to make my mental health screening available to the state. If you don't want to give consent, you don't get to buy a gun.

I will admit that I think this is easily the most questionable part of my "proposals." I use that term loosely because they aren't even real proposals, just internet chatter to try and solicit other ideas and start a dialogue. Mental Health is still such a relative unknown and obscure field that it would probably be nearly impossible to set a minimum standard for gun ownership. If you're battling depression, are you automatically disqualified? Because I think if asked the right questions, damn near everyone could be diagnosed with some form of depression. So maybe this part of it isn't even feasible.

The other obvious concern with it is that anyone can snap at any given time. So maybe I've got a clean bill of mental health today and I buy a gun. Then tomorrow, my g/f leaves me, my dogs get run over by a truck and my house burns to the ground. That could certainly flip the crazy switch inside of me and I decide to take my newly purchased gun to the mall and unload a few magazines.

Obviously, people might look at that and say that the system failed. But did it? Or did I fall through a crack that can't be filled unless you require daily screenings? Or should mental health not be a requirement at all since anyone is capable of losing their mind at any given time? Personally, I think that in that given scenario, the system did it's job. The goal is to try and prevent people from buying guns if they are already dealing with some mental health issues, specifically ones that could lead to violence.

T

Danville PA

Username hidden
(3235 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

" Guns are built to kill."

Most of my guns are designed and built to hit targets very accurately for competition, but they can kill if need be

Pittsburgh PA

Username hidden
(17914 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

LOL Robert did you not just read my last post. My weapons are secured. You talk about a trained militia that does not apply to owing firearms.That has already been decided. Mental health test every so often. No way. Fix the mental health system let them report what they find. PERIOD.